1 2 3 4 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 5 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 6 7 CHRIS LANGER, Case No. 20-cv-06516-KAW 8 Plaintiff, ORDER REQUIRING JOINT STATUS 9 v. REPORT; VACATING CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE 10 MATTRESS FIRM, INC., Re: Dkt. No. 21 11 Defendant. a 12

13 On July 27, 2021, the parties filed their case management conference statement,' in which

v 14 || they stated that they “anticipate finalizing the terms of the [Settlement] Agreement within 30 © 2 ays. t. No. 21 at 6.) Accordingly, the Court the August 3, case 3 15 || days.” (Dkt. No. 21 at 6.) Accordingly, the C VACATES the A 3, 2021 Q 16 || management conference and ORDERS the parties to file a joint status report as to the status of

17 || settlement by September 2, 2021.

18 IT IS SO ORDERED. 19 || Dated: July 29, 2021 : 20 ak A. WESTMORE United States Magistrate Judge 22 23 24 25 ' The Court notes that Defendant stated that it did not consent to magistrate judge jurisdiction in the case management conference statement. (Dkt. No. 21 at 6.) Plaintiff and Defendant 26 || Previously filed consents to magistrate judge jurisdiction. (Dkt. Nos. 5, 13.) Once all parties have consented, there is no absolute right to withdraw that consent. See Dixon v. Yist,

, 97 || 480 (th Cir. 1993). Rather, the referral to a magistrate judge can only be vacated by the court “for good cause shown on its own motion, or under extraordinary circumstance shown by any 2g || party.”

(c)(4). No such extraordinary circumstances have been articulated by Defendant.